j_b

Dude, if your rhetoric ever approached something beyond sophomoric stupidities (I certainly never expected or mentioned an "academic standard" LOL), I could almost be satisfied. As I told you the other day, your long-term trolling behavior in itself is certainly not a sign of very good mental health. You should get it checked. Lashing out at people for years on end as a preferred mode of interaction is likely to hide other problems.

Not really (as you can see when I started posting in this thread) but I do get on a high horse when a couple of freedumb knuckleheads think they can systematically smear the people they don't like, especially when I have been a target of it a fair amount since my beginning on this forum. If you need a refresher, you can just backtrack up this thread and see for yourself who systematically flings shit at others instead just giving their opinion.

As if anybody's writing style was a good excuse for making an ass of yourself by declaring someone's TRs not "worthy". I could understand some display of immature bravado if you were some kind of hot shot, but this is obviously not applicable to you.

It's not my fault if in addition to ragging on youth like a reactionary old fart, you can't muster anything beyond juvenile bully rhetoric. You could at least make an effort and spare us another one of your lamentable display of public embarrassment.

Chris Dodd? What did he say?

You, sir, are a liar, a shill, and a neanderthal. quite meaningless when used out of all context and despite any logic, which, as you know very well, wasn't the case when I have addressed these adjectives at you (I bet it'll happen again). Do you need a reminder of how these epithets applied to what your wrote here? (by opposition to your baseless hateful rhetoric?) I feel like I am talking to a child.

Very open minded of you, freedumb posturing hypocrite.

Bashing someone because you don't think their climbing worthy of a TR is really, really lame behavior on a climbing web site. Just another window into your lovable personality, I guess. I won't bother considering how the "worthiness" of your own TRs compare because it should be obvious but isn't there any limit to your spewing bile at folks?

Internet wars

besides giving you the opportunity to gratuitously lash out at someone on a daily basis and wearing a watch, i am not sure what else. We both have 2 legs?

Don't they teach bus routes and stops in school anymore? Damn kids!

Crazy fuckers

what problem?

SOPA protests

I'd have expected the driver to tell the kid where to get off the bus rather than to ask him to think (). May be the story wasn't related properly but I don't see anything there that justifies indicting youth.

Heard this cool interview of Weinberger ("internet theorist") about his new book 'Too Big to Know' or how the internet is changing the nature of knowledge. Whether networks enable a better representation of "truth", pitfalls of echo-chambers, etc.. I haven't read the book yet but the interview raised lots of questions that many internet swashbucklers have probably thought about over the last ~10 years. We'd be living in the best times ever for knowledge seekers and have unmatched opportunities to be total idiots. http://www.kuow.org/program.php?id=25697

FW is on a campaign to get tvash banned so there isn't any slanderous and hateful rhetoric too low for him. Just another day at the office for FW.

Stalin and Mao lived to be in their 70's and 80's respectively. So you found 2, out of how many perpetrators? (also note that we weren't talking about those calling the shots from behind a desk until your pal Jay put it there). btw, how many former accomplices of Mao and Stalin died in some form of gulag?

You talk about them as if the individuals who perpetrated these mass murders benefited from them. What do you think is the proportion of warriors part of Genghis Khan's first raid that survived the last raid and enjoyed the benefit of dominating Asia? Nobody knows, right? but in all likelihood, not very many considering how easy it is to die doing what they were doing. In other words, they enjoyed that life until it was their turn to have their head put on a spike.

Not only having constant paranoia about people plotting against you (among the numerous sequels that result from being a murderous asshole) isn't my idea of enjoying life but a good share of these people didn't have a long life or especially peaceful death.

I doubt that "inheriting the earth" has ever made becoming a butcher worthwhile to anybody.

no, i'm not saying that. obviously our soldiers are good at killing people and have been for a long time. the sick fucks at sand creek in 1864 oughta be a fine example of that. I don't follow the logic. If dehumanizing desensitization techniques are effective how could they not play a role in what soldiers do today, irrespective of past atrocities. Although nations have always demonized their enemies, I don't especially feel that society prepares people to kill. In fact, society tends to place a premium on getting along.

My bad for an unfortunate use of hyperbola, I should have looked into it further. However, few authors on the topic disagree with the gist of his findings even though they disparage his methods. There is considerable historical evidence showing that soldiers were very reluctant to kill and that modern desensitization techniques have changed that. don't move the goal posts. Nobody claimed that people weren't more willing to kill when under threat. People claimed that even when under threat a large number were reluctant to kill. nice rhetoric but you fail to address the essence of my objection to your post: soldiers undergo intensive desensitization to killing, therefore comparing them to you is irrelevant (although you've certainly got the islamophobia bit down pat)